Search results

Right, because it makes MUCH more logical sense to teach that God makes a genuine appeal to his enemies without actually granting them the ability to willingly respond. Sure, keep telling yourself that. :laugh:

I mean it just like you answered here. It means inevitable or effectual. Why must a work of God inevitably cause a man to obey for that work to be credited to God? Why can't you affirm that God may do a work that enables a response without effectually causing a response? If one is enabled to...

I agree, but Calvinists put themselves in a catch 22 on this point. If they argue that a faith response to the gospel appeal is a "work" then they too have to admit they believe we are saved by Grace through works. Regardless of if the 'faith response' is free or irresistibly caused by the...

Would those of you who would consider yourself Calvinistic agree or disagree with this assessment, and why? "Critics of Arminianism tend to portray the Arminian view of election in this way: God elects to salvation those whom He knows will believe anyway, therefore election is basically...

It is the mark of an educated mind to be able to entertain a thought without accepting it. -Aristotle That was in my sig before I replaced it with the Tozer quote. :laugh: Maybe after you teach them english you can teach me Chinese. :)

Yeah, I know what you are saying. We can tend toward the herd mentality sometimes. I guess my experience with formal debate in HS and College broke some of that tendency for me. It was drilled into us to be able to switch sides of a debate at any moment and know how to respond to any...

Even when enabled by God to do so? Why does that enabling work have to be 'irresistible' for you to consider it a work of God? Please answer this question: Is the Gospel itself a work of the Holy Spirit? If so, why do you assume its an insufficient work to accomplish its purpose of making an...

This quote here provides a perfect example of what I'm talking about. Honestly, I don't have a real problem with this interpretation. But notice that the text ITSELF says that God 'changed his mind.' So, its not just that it 'seems to us that God changed His mind,' the text actually says that...

Amy, you are better than this. Don't stoop to such levels. It is really beneath you. Please edit this and let's take the high road. Okay? I couldn't agree more. I also agree with this. Great point. :thumbs: This is the very root of all I have been arguing. Maybe you misread my intent?

Well, we agree on this point, for sure. :thumbsup: I admit that I may have judged your motives too quickly, you do appear to objectively examine 'leader's' of all stripes, and your articles seem very well researched. While I prefer to deal almost exclusively with a scholars actual claims...

Oh, now I'm following you. Sorry, I misunderstood what you were saying. You may have a point.

Ok, I admit it. :sleep:

Here I'll let Wesley explain it: Indeed, if man were not free, he could not be accountable either for his thoughts, word, or actions. If he were not free, he would not be capable either of reward or punishment; he would be incapable either of virtue or vice, of being either morally good or...

No, it teaches that if they were to be left to themselves they will never seek God, or attain righteousness through the law. It says nothing of their inability to respond to a God actively seeking reconciliation, or to attain righteousness by grace through faith. Calvinists seem to think...

Luke 19:40

Read back through the thread and you will see that I'm not defending any of their statements. I'm defending what I believe may be the intent of poorly worded statements. I just find it interesting that if we are talking about the OT texts where God says he is about to destroy Israel but after...

Oh, and on the 'rocks crying out' question. You said that God foreknew no one would chose to worship, yet the bible says if that were to happen the very stones would have cried out. Why would it say the stones would be made to cry out, if the real plan was to make the people cry out?

So, let me see if I have this straight. God knew that if he gave men free will that none of them would choose to come even if invited by a powerful life-giving Holy Spirit wrought gospel appeal...SOOO based on that foreknowledge (of something that never actually happen, but just his knowledge...

But will you? :praying:

Sorry, I took 'good' as 'sinless', because that is the typical general meaning, but you were just saying that I believe men are able to respond to their Creator's appeal to be reconciled. Why wouldn't they be, unless God's appeal was lacking, or unless of course God was judicially blinding them...